The American Civil Liberties Union filed a suit in federal court today on behalf of three city residents — one a school committee member — to block the panhandling ordinances that took effect in late January.

The civil suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Worcester, by lawyer Kevin P. Martin claims the ordinances are unconstitutional, violate free speech and the right for people to peacefully solicit donations in public.

Mr. Martin, a volunteer lawyer from the Boston firm of Goodwin Procter LLP, also said in the suit that the ordinances target the poor and homeless. The plaintiffs are listed as Robert Thayer and Sharon Brownson, two people described as homeless city residents; and Tracy O'Connell Novick, a member of the school committee here.

"The laws are intended to prevent so-called 'aggressive' begging, but in fact prohibit a great deal of peaceful conduct which is protected expression," Mr. Martin said.

City Solicitor David M. Moore said as of Monday afternoon the city had not received the complaint. He said the city would respond accordingly in court.

He believed the two ordinances would hold up in court. “It is not targeted free speech. It is based on public safety issues,” Mr. Moore said. While talking about ordinances directed at aggressive panhandling, Mr. Moore said the city reviewed similar ordinances in Los Angeles, Washington state and New York. All of those ordinances faced First Amendment challenges and were upheld by the courts, Mr. Moore said.

The suit asks for a federal judge to issue a preliminary injunction prohibiting the city from enforcing the ordinances and for a judge to find the ordinances unconstitutional.

The two ordinances make "aggressive" panhandling illegal and limit panhandling within 20 feet of number of different locations such as outdoor cafes, automated teller machines and public restrooms. There are restrictions against panhandling after dark as well.

Soliciting cash from drivers while standing in a street, walking into traffic or standing on a traffic island is not allowed under the ordinance. The ACLU notes that rotaries and traffic medians are used by politicians and others as forums for public speech.

"Individuals like Plaintiffs Robert Thayer and Sharon Brownson who depend on assistance from strangers for basic necessities like food and shelter now risk arrest if they stand peacefully and quietly on a sidewalk what a sign that says, 'Please Help," if there is a public restroom, bus stop, or pay phone within 20 feet, or if they step into stopped traffic to receive a proffered donation," the civil suit states.

The complaint continues, "Local politicians like Plaintiff Tracy Novick are now prohibited from campaigning on traffic islands and rotaries that have traditionally been used for political speech."

She campaigned on traffic islands in 2009 and 2011 and intends to run for re-election this fall.

The suit claims the city has shown intent to selectively enforce the ordinance by targeting the homeless, while allowing others to violate the ordinance without repercussions.

The ACLU cites the February protest by activists objecting to the city's panhandling ordinances. The group stood in Lincoln Square with a couple standing in the median strip asking for donations. Police did not respond to that protest.

Christopher Robarge, Central Massachusetts field coordinator for the ACLU of Massachusetts, had testified in front of city councilors during different meetings about the ordinances and warned that overly broad ordinances have been overturned in the past.

"My message to the council before they passed these ordinances was you have a right to free speech, and the content of the signs is irrelevant," he said.

Although the heart of the ordinances was to drive down what was deemed "aggressive" panhandlers, the ordinances also affected other groups such as organizations that used "tag days" to raise money and politicians campaigning in the city, Mr. Robarge said.

There are existing laws that can address aggressive panhandlers, ACLU officials contend.

"Rather than narrowly tailoring the ordinances to the stated goal of protecting public safety, the City has instead chosen to proscribe a wide range of peaceful and constitutionally-protected expression, none of which implicates any safety concerns," the civil suit said.

The ACLU accuses the city of violating the right to equal protection of the laws and enforcing the ordinance against the homeless and poor. Some homeless people have been arrested already. Those found in violation can be fined $50.

"I think that there is sort of a cruel irony there," Mr. Robarge said. "It seems to be a further criminalization of being poor."

The suit said Mr. Thayer and Ms. Brownson have been homeless for three years and regularly stand on sidewalks and next to roadways asking for help or money. They don't approach or touch vehicles unless a driver gestures. He only steps in the roadway to collect a donation, the suit said. They have both been told by police that they cannot panhandle on the sidewalk next to a roadway, the suit claims.

CDL A DELIVERY DRIVERS Home Every Night! Needed for our Worcester Depot! Drive local - No more spending valuable nights away from your family! As a Direct Store Delivery Representative YOU have the opportunity to make a difference with our customers! Provide excellent customer service; interact in a positive manner with our customers; deliver our products to local stores. Be home every night! Work for a Company that has been around for over 80 years! Minimum of 3 months driving experience with CDL A/B; GED or HS diploma required; Must be able to drive a standard transmission. EEO/Veteran/Disability Growing Strong Since1933!